Abstract
The variables of coding (constant vs. varied) and spacing (massed vs. distributed) were factorially combined in an independent-groups design. Sixteen nominal pairs were presented twice, with the two presentations being either massed or distributed. A given nominal pair (e.g., AR-LE) was accompanied either by the same word-pair code on both presentations (e.g.,arm-leg) or by a different code on each presentation (e.g.,arm-leg; arrive-leave). On a subsequent recall test, the nominal stimulus only was shown. Better recall of the nominal response was found after constant coding and after distributed presentations, and there was no interaction between the spacing and coding variables. The results (a) support none of the current proposed explanations for the distributed practice effect, and (b) suggest that the critical factor in determining the probability of response recall is the strength of the strongest potential route to the response, not the number of different routes. This research was supported by a grant from the Graduate School of the University of Wisconsin.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.